http://wehuntedthemammoth.com/
The ultimate endgame of the MRA page. :lulz:
That is genius!
Quote"No one could deny that there is open warfare on men all throughout western society. Whether or not it is deserved is somewhat irrelevant (you'll see why in a second). There's a minority of men who are alarmed but the vast majority just doesn't have this on their radar...yet. This is mostly because it doesn't affect them directly."
How can there be "open warfare" on men if most men haven't even noticed it? Has there ever been a war in which the majority of those ostensibly affected by it don't even know that it exists?
It's interesting how if you replace "man" with "the white race" almost all Red Pill (http://www.businessinsider.com/the-red-pill-reddit-2013-8?IR=T) literature reads like white supremacist screeds.
Depressingly, I'd bet an alarming number would share both beliefs.
Pretty much.
Red Pill philosophy is essentially an attempt to recruit people into Neoreactionary politics, and the overlap is pretty obvious (http://www.rooshv.com/cultural-collapse-theory).
There's a tool you can use on Reddit to correlate users of one particular subreddit with another. Red Pill correlates very strongly with relationship subreddits (obviously), but also fat-hate subreddits, Bitcoin, libertarian, gaming (League of Legends/DotA2), bodybuilding/MMA and male fashion subs, anarcho-capitalism, white rights, conservative and similar subs.
How accurate is that tool?
I suspect there is great trolling potential with it.
Pretty accurate. It uses reddit mod tools to correlate membership across subreddits on a monthly basis. Of course, there is also an overlap between websites like, for example, TheRedPill and SubredditDrama because the latter makes fun of the former, so you can't divine motivations behind shared membership, only that they exist.
Quote from: Cain on June 26, 2015, 11:40:43 AM
Pretty much.
Red Pill philosophy is essentially an attempt to recruit people into Neoreactionary politics, and the overlap is pretty obvious (http://www.rooshv.com/cultural-collapse-theory).
There's a tool you can use on Reddit to correlate users of one particular subreddit with another. Red Pill correlates very strongly with relationship subreddits (obviously), but also fat-hate subreddits, Bitcoin, libertarian, gaming (League of Legends/DotA2), bodybuilding/MMA and male fashion subs, anarcho-capitalism, white rights, conservative and similar subs.
Whoever wrote that seems to have a misunderstanding of the definition of "native population".
Roosh V has pushed new frontiers in how to be wrong. His main "thesis" if you will is that feminism has caused adrogynised men (?) who women wont sleep with (?). I mean the whole PUA/red pill philosophy is "women are icky and evil/a man's worth is measured by how many women he sleeps with" so we're not exactly talking a coherent worldview in the first place.
Quote from: Cain on June 27, 2015, 06:50:08 AM
Roosh V has pushed new frontiers in how to be wrong. His main "thesis" if you will is that feminism has caused adrogynised men (?) who women wont sleep with (?). I mean the whole PUA/red pill philosophy is "women are icky and evil/a man's worth is measured by how many women he sleeps with" so we're not exactly talking a coherent worldview in the first place.
That's hilarious, because I'm as feminist as I know how to be, and if I was some fucking MRA, Jenn would throw me out on my ass.
The other major pillar of RedPill philosophy is that women are "emotionally teenagers" and "gold-diggers" and so on. If she is with a "beta male", it's for the financial stability, and she is cheating on him.
You really have to read their subreddit though (http://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/), to see the full terribleness of it in action.
Quote from: Cain on June 27, 2015, 07:39:23 AM
The other major pillar of RedPill philosophy is that women are "emotionally teenagers" and "gold-diggers" and so on. If she is with a "beta male", it's for the financial stability, and she is cheating on him.
You really have to read their subreddit though (http://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/), to see the full terribleness of it in action.
I'll do that tomorrow night.
It's fascinating that while society marches onward in the general direction of things getting better for everyone, there are always a few miserable souls absolutely dedicated to making things worse.
It's really sad in a way too, because I could really see a valid space for an actual men's "rights" movement (I'd prefer to use the word "issues" than rights). Things like challenging conceptions of masculinity and male gender roles, as well as policy issues like homelessness, mental illness, male rape, prison violence and parental issues could all be covered in a mature and sensible way...
But it's much easier to jerk off about the evil feminists and SJWs and bitches who wont fuck me even though I'm totally an alpha male, so I don't see this happening any time soon.
Quote from: Cain on June 30, 2015, 12:36:49 AM
It's really sad in a way too, because I could really see a valid space for an actual men's "rights" movement (I'd prefer to use the word "issues" than rights). Things like challenging conceptions of masculinity and male gender roles, as well as policy issues like homelessness, mental illness, male rape, prison violence and parental issues could all be covered in a mature and sensible way...
But it's much easier to jerk off about the evil feminists and SJWs and bitches who wont fuck me even though I'm totally an alpha male, so I don't see this happening any time soon.
I agree, those are all very real and serious issues. The funny thing is that currently, most of the people I am aware of who address those social problems (like the staff at Outside In, Central City Concern, and similar agencies) identify as feminists, and that rolls into the dialogue about how the patriarchy oppresses men as well... a part of the conversation that often goes missing in the "MRA vs. Feminists" cage match.
This is my second attempt at this thread, I can see a thought trying to form, and blame my lack of focus on sleep deprivation, anyways...
I was trying to figure how it makes economic sense to feed any "miserable" segment of the population a toxic ideology. Then it dawned on me: The system sold to empower individuals does so at the expense of alienation and conflict, which, through cognitive dissonance, is neglected in favor of reinforcing the misconception of having thereby obtained what one really wants (yay freedom!). This difference yolks said population to a perpetual (re)production of surplus labour, where every attempt at self-determination is predetermined to reinforce the machinery of disenfranchisement, while avoiding detection as such.
This of course applies to the main PUA/MRA(?) movement, however may also extend to military recruitment tactics, etc, I think. (over/out)
Quote from: LuciferX on June 30, 2015, 03:59:12 AM
.
This of course applies to the main PUA/MRA(?) movement, however may also extend to military recruitment tactics, etc, I think. (over/out)
Were you ever in the military? Because there is precisely jack and shit in common with PUA/MRA "recruitment" and military recruitment.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on June 30, 2015, 06:05:34 AM
Quote from: LuciferX on June 30, 2015, 03:59:12 AM
.
This of course applies to the main PUA/MRA(?) movement, however may also extend to military recruitment tactics, etc, I think. (over/out)
Were you ever in the military? Because there is precisely jack and shit in common with PUA/MRA "recruitment" and military recruitment.
The similarity I noticed was both sell techniques that purport to obtain the enabling conditions of freedom, a bait that is then switched for bondage. The 'will to power' is the exploit used, and it works through misdirection. Unless treating each other as territory to be conquered is really our thing, I'd say I have to agree with my original sentiment, yes, the similarity spans from intention, to method, and results. Also, they are both generally evil, and I don't allow myself to say that often. These are not cases in which exceptions prove the rule, not at all.
Regrettably, I also am connected, by only two uncomfortably close degrees, to the guy that started the whole PUA thing, the guy that com truse played in magnolia. Incidentally, did you know that Top Gun was the Navy's number 1 recruitment tool, ever? Not even funny.
So both the military and PUA/MRA movement...use advertising? Shocking.
Indeed, and even more so that it continues to work, so, transparently.
Quote from: LuciferX on June 30, 2015, 07:48:18 AM
Incidentally, did you know that Top Gun was the Navy's number 1 recruitment tool, ever? Not even funny.
I thought that boy bands were their # 1 recruitment tool. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5UAnq33zRq8
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on June 30, 2015, 02:06:41 AM
Quote from: Cain on June 30, 2015, 12:36:49 AM
It's really sad in a way too, because I could really see a valid space for an actual men's "rights" movement (I'd prefer to use the word "issues" than rights). Things like challenging conceptions of masculinity and male gender roles, as well as policy issues like homelessness, mental illness, male rape, prison violence and parental issues could all be covered in a mature and sensible way...
But it's much easier to jerk off about the evil feminists and SJWs and bitches who wont fuck me even though I'm totally an alpha male, so I don't see this happening any time soon.
I agree, those are all very real and serious issues. The funny thing is that currently, most of the people I am aware of who address those social problems (like the staff at Outside In, Central City Concern, and similar agencies) identify as feminists, and that rolls into the dialogue about how the patriarchy oppresses men as well... a part of the conversation that often goes missing in the "MRA vs. Feminists" cage match.
Yea, i feel like this is an important piece of the puzzle, not because men's problems are necessarily any more or less important than womens' but because the next step towards this enlightened equal society we all seem to want so badly will necessarily require a high degree of empathy and mutual understanding and we'll never get there if both sides of the debate hide behind their "i'm not listen cuz FUCK YOU" shields.
Quote from: LuciferX on June 30, 2015, 07:48:18 AM
.
The similarity I noticed was both sell techniques that purport to obtain the enabling conditions of freedom, a bait that is then switched for bondage. .
The military is nothing like that. In fact, getting in can be a pain in the ass.
And it's a contract, like any other contract. In most cases, it's a "will to go to university".
What, you think recruiters tell you it's all sunshine and gumdrops?
Goodie-goodie gumdrops, no. Although they did offer me some boba tea.
And it is the contract that worries me, because the commitment only dances around the notion of informed consent. I'd argue the stipulation of a choice being made is null if a decision was intentionally misinformed and misdirected, which it is. Second, I'd argue the validity of that contract on the ground that given the privilege afforded elsewhere, it's also not even really a choice if joining is the only way to get an education. I think coercion is a more appropriate designation than contract, and that pisses me off.
[don't want to derail thread]
Quote from: LuciferX on July 01, 2015, 12:18:15 AM
And it is the contract that worries me, because the commitment only dances around the notion of informed consent.
Where do you get that idea?
Quote from: Doktor Howl on July 01, 2015, 01:20:49 AM
Quote from: LuciferX on July 01, 2015, 12:18:15 AM
And it is the contract that worries me, because the commitment only dances around the notion of informed consent.
Where do you get that idea?
The potential loss is difficult to grasp for most males aged 18-28, I think, from personal experience. I don't consider myself entirely unreasonable and yet still was susceptible to suggestion.
If I may allow mself to imagine what it feels like, I'd think the 'draft' at first was breezy, like the invitation of an open door, slowly turning into a massive undertow.
This kind of training may be good but the end result is something of a complex beast. The only way I know to kill it is not to serve it.
I have a feeling you may have a better grasp on the subject, so I wouldn't be opposed to conversation, it's your thread?
Quote from: LuciferX on July 01, 2015, 05:50:04 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on July 01, 2015, 01:20:49 AM
Quote from: LuciferX on July 01, 2015, 12:18:15 AM
And it is the contract that worries me, because the commitment only dances around the notion of informed consent.
Where do you get that idea?
The potential loss is difficult to grasp for most males aged 18-28, I think, from personal experience. I don't consider myself entirely unreasonable and yet still was susceptible to suggestion.
If I may allow mself to imagine what it feels like, I'd think the 'draft' at first was breezy, like the invitation of an open door, slowly turning into a massive undertow.
This kind of training may be good but the end result is something of a complex beast. The only way I know to kill it is not to serve it.
I have a feeling you may have a better grasp on the subject, so I wouldn't be opposed to conversation, it's your thread?
Well, we certainly can't allow people to make decisions before they're 70.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on July 01, 2015, 06:24:25 AM
Quote from: LuciferX on July 01, 2015, 05:50:04 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on July 01, 2015, 01:20:49 AM
Quote from: LuciferX on July 01, 2015, 12:18:15 AM
And it is the contract that worries me, because the commitment only dances around the notion of informed consent.
Where do you get that idea?
The potential loss is difficult to grasp for most males aged 18-28, I think, from personal experience. I don't consider myself entirely unreasonable and yet still was susceptible to suggestion.
If I may allow mself to imagine what it feels like, I'd think the 'draft' at first was breezy, like the invitation of an open door, slowly turning into a massive undertow.
This kind of training may be good but the end result is something of a complex beast. The only way I know to kill it is not to serve it.
I have a feeling you may have a better grasp on the subject, so I wouldn't be opposed to conversation, it's your thread?
Well, we certainly can't allow people to make decisions before they're 70.
Okay, what if we actually presented them with a choice, instead of pretending that war is the answer?
[I'm not saying the problem is easy]
The fuck does joining the army have to do with perpetuating war?
Quote from: Demolition Squid on July 01, 2015, 08:12:32 AM
The fuck does joining the army have to do with perpetuating war?
Non Serviam
Quote from: LuciferX on July 01, 2015, 09:26:39 AM
Quote from: Demolition Squid on July 01, 2015, 08:12:32 AM
The fuck does joining the army have to do with perpetuating war?
Non Serviam
Exactly, it is quite hard for a war to start if both sides have no soldiers.
It gets complicated if one side
does have soldiers though.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on July 01, 2015, 06:24:25 AM
Quote from: LuciferX on July 01, 2015, 05:50:04 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on July 01, 2015, 01:20:49 AM
Quote from: LuciferX on July 01, 2015, 12:18:15 AM
And it is the contract that worries me, because the commitment only dances around the notion of informed consent.
Where do you get that idea?
The potential loss is difficult to grasp for most males aged 18-28, I think, from personal experience. I don't consider myself entirely unreasonable and yet still was susceptible to suggestion.
If I may allow mself to imagine what it feels like, I'd think the 'draft' at first was breezy, like the invitation of an open door, slowly turning into a massive undertow.
This kind of training may be good but the end result is something of a complex beast. The only way I know to kill it is not to serve it.
I have a feeling you may have a better grasp on the subject, so I wouldn't be opposed to conversation, it's your thread?
Well, we certainly can't allow people to make decisions before they're 70.
I think LuciferX is under the impression that quitting the army is always desertion and refusing to follow unethical orders will get you locked up.
That is only true during war time, so that almost never applies.
Quote from: Reginald Ret on July 01, 2015, 10:13:01 AM
It gets complicated if one side does have soldiers though.
So long as it's the other side, I can live with that.
if our strategy wasn't MAD, I wonder how much more the 'other' side would stand against US;
or, doesn't the US having a foreign policy have a weird ring to it?
[I hate myself for saying this, but we have not lost that loving feeling]